Re: Internal webserver vs. Apache on MX for JRun was Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone
> > What's the advantage of running through a webserver such > > as Apache versus the web server that's built in to JRun? > > Mind you, I'm talking about *CFMX FOR JRUN*, not CFMX > > standalone. I know about the standalone performance > > differences, but do these same differences exist for > > JRun? > > As far as I can tell, there's no difference between the web server used by > CFMX for JRun and that used by the "standalone" CFMX Enterprise or > Professional. So, yes, I imagine that the same differences exist, whatever > they are. Macromedia simply states that you shouldn't use it for production > use, and I've never tried to. Are your comments based on any sort of stress testing results or published literature? I agree with what you're saying, but last time we made an assumption about the two products being the same (Re: CFMX Enterprise vs. CFMX for J2EE), MM chimed in and said there were some unexpected differences between the two products. So I suppose I was hoping that Sean or Phil or somebody else at MM could weigh in with the "official" response. However, that being said, I have been proceeding on the premise that what you said is how it is. > > For a relatively low-traffic, internally used site, does > > it matter if I go into the jrun.xml file and change the > > port fro 8100 to 80 and just go with that? > > Probably not. However, if you're using any of the extra functionality that > your web server might provide, obviously you won't get that with the JRun > web server. For example, server authentication - that's something I rely on > quite a bit. Personally, I'd rather use IIS or Apache anyway just because I > feel they're easier to manage. Good call on authentication. I got so hung up on potential performance differences that I forgot about the obvious! Thanks again, Dave. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
OT Any CFers at MacWorld 2003?
I know that CF people from MM monitor this list -- I wonder if any CF people will be in the MM booth at MacWorld 2003 -- Starts Jan 07, 2003. TIA Dick ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: newbie school of hard knocks
Mike, I would consider putting your validation at a lower level than your CF code. In other words, I would put a unique constraint on your table for the fields that you want to be unique. I generally like this approach better than validating in CF because you can be sure the same validation rules will exist regardless of which code is touching your database. Even if there is a completely different application (written in a completely different language) inserting data into your table, if the constraint is at the database level, you never have to worry about duplicate records. Doing your validation at the CF level also introduces race conditions. in other words, unless you lock your code, it's technically possible (unlikely, but possible) that between the time you do your validation and your insert, another thread could insert a duplicate record. I don't know what database you are using, but all databases that I know of allow you to specify such constraints. Christian On Friday, January 3, 2003, at 10:33 AM, Mike Miessen wrote: > I have successfully created a form to update (append) to the database. > Now that I have accomplished this fantastic feat of skill I find that I > have several duplicate entries that resulted from my testing. How can > I > check for and avoid duplicate entries. Since I am new to both CF and > SQL I don't know which component to refer to for this task. > > I know you guys will point me in the right direction. > > Thanks. > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: How do I get the domain name extracted from the URL of a requ ested page?
Thanks, everyone. CGI.Server_Name worked fine. Sorry I took so long to thank everyone for your help. I believe it was *last year* when I first posted the question! ;o) Rick -Original Message- From: Everett, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 11:45 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: How do I get the domain name extracted from the URL of a requ ested page? Have you tried CGI.SERVER_NAME CGI.HTTP_HOST If you have the URL but not the CGI variables you can also use: ListGetAt(myURL,2,"/") > -Original Message- > From: Rick Faircloth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 11:41 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: How do I get the domain name extracted from the URL of a > requested page? > > > Hi, all. > > I've searched the archives, but not getting the info. > > I want to be able to determine the domain name in the URL > when a visitor comes to a site. This has to do with the issue > of setting up one set of .cfm pages to change according to what > company's info is being requested. > > From http://www.bodafordhomes.com/cfdocs/rea/index.cfm > > I want to get www.bodafordhomes.com and compare it to a domain name > stored in my database to know which graphics, info, etc. to display. > > How do I get that domain name from the URL? Is there a CGI > variable that > does this like it does the IP? Or do I have to parse the > URL? Does the URL > itself exist as a variable that I can parse? > > Thanks for the help. > > Happy New Year everyone! > > Rick > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Internal webserver vs. Apache on MX for JRun was Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone
> What's the advantage of running through a webserver such > as Apache versus the web server that's built in to JRun? > Mind you, I'm talking about *CFMX FOR JRUN*, not CFMX > standalone. I know about the standalone performance > differences, but do these same differences exist for > JRun? As far as I can tell, there's no difference between the web server used by CFMX for JRun and that used by the "standalone" CFMX Enterprise or Professional. So, yes, I imagine that the same differences exist, whatever they are. Macromedia simply states that you shouldn't use it for production use, and I've never tried to. > For a relatively low-traffic, internally used site, does > it matter if I go into the jrun.xml file and change the > port fro 8100 to 80 and just go with that? Probably not. However, if you're using any of the extra functionality that your web server might provide, obviously you won't get that with the JRun web server. For example, server authentication - that's something I rely on quite a bit. Personally, I'd rather use IIS or Apache anyway just because I feel they're easier to manage. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional
I've installed eval copy of SQL2000 on my XP Prof Edition without any problem. The account I used during installation belongs to "System administrator" group. Don Li --- Peter Tilbrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It does not appear to be the draconian measures > instilled by the > "Administrators" of our new work network install of > WinXp Pro. At the very > end of the SQL Server 2000 install (Personal > Edition) a permissions error is > encountered and the install fails. > > I've tried the install at home with the same result > (licensed XP and SQL > Server). > > Any ideas on how to get SQL Server 2000 installed > under XP Pro? This is > straight off the CD-ROM so I cannot even apply the > SP2 as yet. > > Grateful for any help - even though MySQL is good - > very good - our > production environment is SQL. > > Thanks! > > PT! > > == > Peter Tilbrook > ColdGen Pty. Ltd. > > http://www.coldgen.dns2go.com/ > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Internal webserver vs. Apache on MX for JRun was Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone
I've been enjoying this thread immensely, as the support/community for CFMX for J2EE servers is extremely sparse and I've had lots of different questions. I've seen posts on the forums regarding the following question, but have yet to see a reply. What's the advantage of running through a webserver such as Apache versus the web server that's built in to JRun? Mind you, I'm talking about *CFMX FOR JRUN*, not CFMX standalone. I know about the standalone performance differences, but do these same differences exist for JRun? For a relatively low-traffic, internally used site, does it matter if I go into the jrun.xml file and change the port fro 8100 to 80 and just go with that? Thanks, Dave. - Original Message - From: "Dick Applebaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:39 PM Subject: Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone > Jochem > > With your and Sean's comments and reading Sean's Blogs, I think I have > it now. > > With CFMXJ2ee and JRun you can. > > 1) Set up multiple JRun Servers (Server Instances). Each of these, > effectively, uses a separate OS Process and JVM. > > 2) Each JRun Server Instance can run 1 (or more) applications, for > example one ore more copies (contexts) of CFMX. > > 3) Duplicate Server instances can be clustered to provide > load-balancing and improved availability > > My original objective was to isolate multiple CFMX sites from each > other on the same box, so as to allow use of "dangerous" features of > CFMX such as cfobject. > > The best way to do this is to run each CFMX site on a separate JRun > Server Instance, e.g. > > JRun Server A --- Client hosted Customer SomeCompany site > JRun Server B --- Client hosted Customer SomeOtherCompany site > JRun Server C --- Client hosted Customer YetAnotherCompany site > --- Client hosted Customer > YetAnotherCompany site (a different application) > > Each of these would have its own JVM and would be secure from the others > > This would potentially outperform CFMX Standalone server sharing 1 (the > only 1) CFMX context among the 3 sites > > The only way to isolate these sites using CFMX Standalone server is to > run each on a separate box -- this requires a separate CFMX Standalone > license for each box, no? > > If we use CFMXJ2ee and JRun we require a separate licenses for each > CPU, whether on the same or another box. > > Each set of CFMXJ2ee/JRun licenses cost about the same as a CFMX > Standalone Enterprise license. (Actually, CFMX JRun costs less) > > In my client's case, these are low-activity sites, so they likely can > be hosted on a single box and additional CPUs added, as necessary. > > To accomplish what my client needs (multiple CFMX sites, dangerous > tags) it appears that the CFMXJ2ee/JRun combo provides the best, and > possibly least expensive, solution. > > Any holes in this logic? > > TIA > > Dick > > On Saturday, January 4, 2003, at 06:21 AM, Jochem van Dieten wrote: > > > Dick Applebaum wrote: > >> > >> I haven't seen it mentioned, but wouldn't another advantage be that > >> each context would be able to use "dangerous" CFMX features such as > >> cfobject, custom tags, etc., because the contexts are isolated. > > > > Contexts are only of limited use here. They only serve to protect from > > eachother through the underlying Java code, but if you call a COM > > object > > that COM object is not protected. > > What is really needed to secure different applications from eachother > > is > > different instances running using different OS accounts. That way all > > the ACL's the OS usually enforces are still enforced. If you set the > > ACL's right, it is no problem giving users access to cfregistry, > > cfobject, cfexecute etc. because they can only change what the ACL's > > allow them to change. > > > > > >> If this is true, wouldn't you expect that shared-host providers would > >> use CFMXJ2ee instead of CFMX Standalone -- better performance, more > >> features, less security exposure? > > > > More $$$ because og per processor licenses. > > > > Jochem > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: newbie school of hard knocks
Not to worry I was not upset by what you said. You have good and valid points. I agree with, for example, with what you say :) -Original Message- From: Andy Ousterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:52 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: newbie school of hard knocks Mike, I did not mean to imply that you shouldn't test thoroughly and that you shouldn't understand and document what user situations you plan on catching, what you will do when you catch them and those situations such as first name/last name that you may choose not too catch. For example, you might note that you chose not to because in doing so, you might inadvertently link two separate users into a second user or show one user's information to another (risk may be greater than the reward). If you are working on a system covered by the FDA, especially a pharmaceutical company, then quality of data is held to even a higher standard. For example, if your system is meant to track people through clinical trials, then you will need to test all fields to determine likelihood of a duplicate and notify data entry person of potential matches and probably provide them with why you thought they might be the same person. Andy -Original Message- From: Mike Miessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: newbie school of hard knocks Wow I wish the company I work for would take this idea to heart. I work for a centralized laboratory that performs clinical drug trials for the big pharmaceutical companies. We have always been compelled (Forced?) to make our code bullet proof so that the user could not enter any invalid or unauthorized data. You are correct that no matter what you do the users often find a way to muck things up but we have always gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent it. I suspect that is part of my motivation to learn this new stuff so that I may find other opportunities open to me. One of the biggest problems with over validating code is that they want to demand you test 6 ways from Sunday and cover all possible values and avenues of entry while at the same time they want it "NOW"! Or yesterday which ever comes first. Lord help you if later someone breaks your code doing something stupid. Then there is the FDA regulation but, that's another corruption of life. It may take me a few minutes to adopt another mindset as I have been under the watchful eye for so long. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional
I can't tell you how many times I have run into nonsense errors like this when installing SQL 2000. In my eyes, although SQL 2000 has a good core engine, the install and the interface is very buggy and sensitive to system and software oddities. I wish I could tell give you specific advise, although I don't have any.. just wanted to let you know you are not alone. Dustin Snell Unisyn Software, LLC AutoMate - The Leading Windows Automation Software http://www.unisyn.com - Original Message - From: "Robert Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 9:58 AM Subject: RE: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional > I had the problem installing it as well, but even though it hang at the > end, my SQL still worked. Then my computer crashed, had to reinstall XP, > so started from scratch, and had no problems with the SQL install. Odd, > huh? Do you have admin rights on that machine? > > -Original Message- > From: Peter Tilbrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 9:38 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional > > It does not appear to be the draconian measures instilled by the > "Administrators" of our new work network install of WinXp Pro. At the > very > end of the SQL Server 2000 install (Personal Edition) a permissions > error is > encountered and the install fails. > > I've tried the install at home with the same result (licensed XP and SQL > Server). > > Any ideas on how to get SQL Server 2000 installed under XP Pro? This is > straight off the CD-ROM so I cannot even apply the SP2 as yet. > > Grateful for any help - even though MySQL is good - very good - our > production environment is SQL. > > Thanks! > > PT! > > == > Peter Tilbrook > ColdGen Pty. Ltd. > > http://www.coldgen.dns2go.com/ > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional
I had the problem installing it as well, but even though it hang at the end, my SQL still worked. Then my computer crashed, had to reinstall XP, so started from scratch, and had no problems with the SQL install. Odd, huh? Do you have admin rights on that machine? -Original Message- From: Peter Tilbrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 9:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: HELP: Installation of SQL Server 2000 under WinXP Professional It does not appear to be the draconian measures instilled by the "Administrators" of our new work network install of WinXp Pro. At the very end of the SQL Server 2000 install (Personal Edition) a permissions error is encountered and the install fails. I've tried the install at home with the same result (licensed XP and SQL Server). Any ideas on how to get SQL Server 2000 installed under XP Pro? This is straight off the CD-ROM so I cannot even apply the SP2 as yet. Grateful for any help - even though MySQL is good - very good - our production environment is SQL. Thanks! PT! == Peter Tilbrook ColdGen Pty. Ltd. http://www.coldgen.dns2go.com/ ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: newbie school of hard knocks
Mike, I did not mean to imply that you shouldn't test thoroughly and that you shouldn't understand and document what user situations you plan on catching, what you will do when you catch them and those situations such as first name/last name that you may choose not too catch. For example, you might note that you chose not to because in doing so, you might inadvertently link two separate users into a second user or show one user's information to another (risk may be greater than the reward). If you are working on a system covered by the FDA, especially a pharmaceutical company, then quality of data is held to even a higher standard. For example, if your system is meant to track people through clinical trials, then you will need to test all fields to determine likelihood of a duplicate and notify data entry person of potential matches and probably provide them with why you thought they might be the same person. Andy -Original Message- From: Mike Miessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 10:42 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: newbie school of hard knocks Wow I wish the company I work for would take this idea to heart. I work for a centralized laboratory that performs clinical drug trials for the big pharmaceutical companies. We have always been compelled (Forced?) to make our code bullet proof so that the user could not enter any invalid or unauthorized data. You are correct that no matter what you do the users often find a way to muck things up but we have always gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent it. I suspect that is part of my motivation to learn this new stuff so that I may find other opportunities open to me. One of the biggest problems with over validating code is that they want to demand you test 6 ways from Sunday and cover all possible values and avenues of entry while at the same time they want it "NOW"! Or yesterday which ever comes first. Lord help you if later someone breaks your code doing something stupid. Then there is the FDA regulation but, that's another corruption of life. It may take me a few minutes to adopt another mindset as I have been under the watchful eye for so long. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone
Jochem With your and Sean's comments and reading Sean's Blogs, I think I have it now. With CFMXJ2ee and JRun you can. 1) Set up multiple JRun Servers (Server Instances). Each of these, effectively, uses a separate OS Process and JVM. 2) Each JRun Server Instance can run 1 (or more) applications, for example one ore more copies (contexts) of CFMX. 3) Duplicate Server instances can be clustered to provide load-balancing and improved availability My original objective was to isolate multiple CFMX sites from each other on the same box, so as to allow use of "dangerous" features of CFMX such as cfobject. The best way to do this is to run each CFMX site on a separate JRun Server Instance, e.g. JRun Server A --- Client hosted Customer SomeCompany site JRun Server B --- Client hosted Customer SomeOtherCompany site JRun Server C --- Client hosted Customer YetAnotherCompany site --- Client hosted Customer YetAnotherCompany site (a different application) Each of these would have its own JVM and would be secure from the others This would potentially outperform CFMX Standalone server sharing 1 (the only 1) CFMX context among the 3 sites The only way to isolate these sites using CFMX Standalone server is to run each on a separate box -- this requires a separate CFMX Standalone license for each box, no? If we use CFMXJ2ee and JRun we require a separate licenses for each CPU, whether on the same or another box. Each set of CFMXJ2ee/JRun licenses cost about the same as a CFMX Standalone Enterprise license. (Actually, CFMX JRun costs less) In my client's case, these are low-activity sites, so they likely can be hosted on a single box and additional CPUs added, as necessary. To accomplish what my client needs (multiple CFMX sites, dangerous tags) it appears that the CFMXJ2ee/JRun combo provides the best, and possibly least expensive, solution. Any holes in this logic? TIA Dick On Saturday, January 4, 2003, at 06:21 AM, Jochem van Dieten wrote: > Dick Applebaum wrote: >> >> I haven't seen it mentioned, but wouldn't another advantage be that >> each context would be able to use "dangerous" CFMX features such as >> cfobject, custom tags, etc., because the contexts are isolated. > > Contexts are only of limited use here. They only serve to protect from > eachother through the underlying Java code, but if you call a COM > object > that COM object is not protected. > What is really needed to secure different applications from eachother > is > different instances running using different OS accounts. That way all > the ACL's the OS usually enforces are still enforced. If you set the > ACL's right, it is no problem giving users access to cfregistry, > cfobject, cfexecute etc. because they can only change what the ACL's > allow them to change. > > >> If this is true, wouldn't you expect that shared-host providers would >> use CFMXJ2ee instead of CFMX Standalone -- better performance, more >> features, less security exposure? > > More $$$ because og per processor licenses. > > Jochem > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: newbie school of hard knocks
Wow I wish the company I work for would take this idea to heart. I work for a centralized laboratory that performs clinical drug trials for the big pharmaceutical companies. We have always been compelled (Forced?) to make our code bullet proof so that the user could not enter any invalid or unauthorized data. You are correct that no matter what you do the users often find a way to muck things up but we have always gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent it. I suspect that is part of my motivation to learn this new stuff so that I may find other opportunities open to me. One of the biggest problems with over validating code is that they want to demand you test 6 ways from Sunday and cover all possible values and avenues of entry while at the same time they want it "NOW"! Or yesterday which ever comes first. Lord help you if later someone breaks your code doing something stupid. Then there is the FDA regulation but, that's another corruption of life. It may take me a few minutes to adopt another mindset as I have been under the watchful eye for so long. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Exclude Specific Files from Verity Search - plus one other
Is there a way to specify a list of files (.htm, .cfm or whatever...) for a Verity Collection WHERE the files live in the same folder as files to be indexed? * 2nd question I do not have access to the Cold Fusion administrator for the site in question, so stuff I can do is limited. Verity excludes a number of common words from a search, so someone can't type in "the" and get 50,000 hits... On the search I'm building, if you search for "and", you get the following error: An error occurred while performing an operation in the Search Engine native library. coldfusion.tagext.lang.CFSearchTagException: Error # -40 Error # -40 Error E1-0114 (Query Builder): Error parsing query: and.. Issue for my ISP, correct? Thanks in Advance ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: newbie school of hard knocks
Mike, You can't find this by checking the names, you might just find 2 people who fit your definition of duplicate. You could only check this by using some other User info, like email address or telephone number. I agree with the earlier note that this is not something you should check for. By the way, go to the archives and search on security. There is a thread on some additional checking on any information used in a query that you must perform to prevent someone for destroying, changing or seeing information that you don't want them to. Andy -Original Message- From: Mike Miessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:33 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: newbie school of hard knocks So I'm using the following code to check for duplicates in a table. SELECT COUNT(*) AS total FROM addressbook WHERE FirstName = '#Form.firstname#' AND LastName = '#Form.lastname#' SET DATABASE Else Throw duplicate message Now what would I do if they enter their last name in the first name field and their first name in the lastname field? There has to be a more elegant way of checking both possibilities than to write another counter for that purpose. If you write a second statement would it zero the counter cause and you to have to have a separate counter to check? And finally, if you had a second counter to check how would you best structure the cfif? ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: CFMXJ2ee advantages over CFMX Standalone
Dick Applebaum wrote: > > I haven't seen it mentioned, but wouldn't another advantage be that > each context would be able to use "dangerous" CFMX features such as > cfobject, custom tags, etc., because the contexts are isolated. Contexts are only of limited use here. They only serve to protect from eachother through the underlying Java code, but if you call a COM object that COM object is not protected. What is really needed to secure different applications from eachother is different instances running using different OS accounts. That way all the ACL's the OS usually enforces are still enforced. If you set the ACL's right, it is no problem giving users access to cfregistry, cfobject, cfexecute etc. because they can only change what the ACL's allow them to change. > If this is true, wouldn't you expect that shared-host providers would > use CFMXJ2ee instead of CFMX Standalone -- better performance, more > features, less security exposure? More $$$ because og per processor licenses. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: CFMX Install Problem
Rob - Thanks for your input. Digging around, I found *another* libstdc++yaddayadda library buried six or seven subdirectories inside /usr/lib. I did the symlink thing again, and InstallAnywhere was sufficiently fooled enough to install MX. There was much rejoicing and they ate Sir Robin's Minstrels. Thanks again. - Jim -Original Message- From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 6:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX Install Problem WARNING: educated guesses 0. I had the same type of issues installing 1.4.0_03 but your trickery worked for me. You might want to make a symlink from the libstdc++-3-blah blah.2 if it exists (and it might not be looking in the lib directory) 1. Try setting the JAVA_HOME env variable with the newer jdk 2. MX uses the installer from www.zerog.com, so perhaps they can tell you how to override the jvm 3. I am sure some one from MM will post something better Cheers, Rob -Original Message- From: Jim Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 3:50 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: CFMX Install Problem Hi all - This may fall under the mantle of a Linux- or Java-specific problem, but I'll float this one around the list in case anyone else has had this little monkey on their backs: We're putting CFMX on a clean RedHat 7.2 box. Once the CD is read and mounted and run, the installer craters right after the "Launching installer..." output from the installation program like so: -- /tmp/install.dir.2994/Linux/resource/jre/bin/i386/native_threads/java: error while loading shared libraries: libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory -- To me, this looks like the JRE that the CD's launching isn't finding the right hooks in /usr/lib in order to run. Fair enough, but it's looking for an older version of libstdc++ than what is on my system. So, thinking that the package I had would work, I hatched a cunning plan, and created a symlink to it with the aforementioned shared object's name... -- ln -s /usr/lib/libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.1.1.so.2 -- alas, failure. Has anyone else seen this happen when trying to install MX on Linux? Can I specify a runtime argument pointing towards a working JRE/JVM that already exists on my system in place of the one that the CD wants to use, or is there something obvious that I'm missing (I'm sure it's the latter)? - Jim ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: the openness of Java and .NET (was RE: RE: CFMX and Java)
>s the open platform? Java is a platform > supported by multiple > > vendors, yes, but I don't believe this qualifies > it as open (despite > > what Sun's marketing department might say). > > > Why not? The various Java specifications are > publicly available. Just > because Sun created its own organization (JCP) > instead of using an > established standards body doesn't make Java any > less open. Further, > through the Apache Foundation's hard work, open > source implementations > of the Java specifications can now be certified > through JCP. I understood that as part of creating a specification, the Spec Lead was also responsible for creating a reference implementation, basically to prove that the spec could be implemented. Things such as Tomcat are those reference implementations. Cheers __ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: RE: CFMX and Java
J2EE can be difficult, but I am not sure what is being meant by J2EE in this. JSP form part of J2EE, as do many other technologies. You just pick the ones you need for the problem at hand. Cheers > I agree with everythin you said except the idea that > Java is less expensive. > J2EE is still quite difficult to implement correctly > - and Java and Linux > talent is still very expensive. > > -Mark > > > I am not quite as optimistic about the future of > Java > > Interesting and funny!. I happen to do a little > internet shopping around > Christmas and New year. About 75% of the GOOD > Clothing/accessories/home > decor websites were JSP and am pretty sure they are > in some fashion J2EE > compliant.. and scaled very well inspite of all the > traffic(especially ppl > shopping for good prices and stuff) > > I hope you know that CFMX is just a J2EE Application > deployed on JRun and > quite interesting enough on IBM websphere. > > With sofware giants like IBM/Oracle/Sun/Bea pushing > Java and J2EE...Just > guess.. the open platform is going to win. > Have you read articles of Microsoft Windows.Net and > what corporations think > about their pricing..? > > I really think Linux/Lindows/Open Platform and Java > will take off and in > this economy of corporate cutbacks.. corporations > are actively looking for > cheaper solutions/software. > > As for CFMX and Java... i think for heavy duty > applications.. CFMX will be > suitable for Presentation Tier and Java will be used > for all the heavy duty > middle tier processing.. > btw (we are not talking about a comment form). > > Joe > __ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Looking for SHOESTRING.TTF font
> -Original Message- > From: Peter Tilbrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 12:43 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT: Looking for SHOESTRING.TTF font > > > Anyone know where I can get hold of this very distinct font? > Called "shoestring" it is quite distinct. Very modern - very > "The Matrix" like. I'm not certain it's the one you're looking for, but I have one that's put out by "Southern Software". The (very poor) web site is here: http://ssifonts.com/ It's way too large, but "Shoestring" fonts are on page 19 of this catalog: http://ssifonts.com/SSIVOL13.PDF Just as a warning, none of the navigation links on the inner pages seem to work, however all the front page links do. Hope this helps, Jim Davis ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
